Why, oh why, are kids from trans-Mexican Latin America suddenly lining up for, essentially, asylum on the borders of the U.S.?

It’s because of a law passed a few years ago — one promoted by the same “act first and think later” anti-prostitution religious conservatives like “Californians Against Slavery” that pushed Prop 35 in 2012. It’s not a plot — it’s a law with unintended consequences. We committed not to deporting unaccompanied minors from Central America due to fears that they might otherwise become embroiled in child prostitution — and their governments said “fine, they you have have them.”

And, I almost forgot to mention — it was signed by President George W. Bush in December 2008.

Famed early 19th-century anti-slavery activist Bishop William Wilberforce — and some of the unintended consequences brought to our shores by his naive followers.

I don’t mention the genesis of the law to degrade it. This was well-intentioned, although stopping child prostitution by creating a safe haven for Central American youth (whose countries, by the way, our nation has played a huge hand in wrecking in the interests of anti-communism) has a “bailing out a lake using a thimble” sense to it. The problem with it was that, duly enacted law or not, the people of this country do NOT make fighting child prostitution a major priority — and least not if it costs us anything more than words — and we were nowhere near ready to pay the price for it.

Here’s an article from yesterday’s New York Times that you absolutely, without question, have to read if you want to express an informed opinion on what’s happening right now. (Someone please scotch tape it to Darrell Issa’s forehead; maybe he’ll notice it.) I’ll reproduce its first four paragraphs below, but you should read the whole thing. (Note: I’ve added an important fifth paragraph as well. Forgive me, NYT!)

It was one of the final pieces of legislation signed into law by President George W. Bush, a measure that passed without controversy, along with a pension bill and another one calling for national parks to be commemorated on quarters.

Now the legislation, enacted quietly during the transition to the Obama administration, is at the root of the potentially calamitous flow of unaccompanied minors to the nation’s southern border.

Originally pushed by a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers as well as by evangelical groups to combat sex trafficking, the bill gave substantial new protections to children entering the country alone who were not from Mexico or Canada by prohibiting them from being quickly sent back to their country of origin.

Instead, it required that they be given an opportunity to appear at an immigration hearing and consult with an advocate, and it recommended that they have access to counsel. It also required that they be turned over to the care of the Department of Health and Human Services, and the agency was directed to place the minor “in the least restrictive setting that is in the best interest of the child” and to explore reuniting those children with family members.

There’s more. There’s much, much more for you to read — but that’s the gist. If you don’t read it, if you don’t understand it, if you make up conspiracy theories that fail to recognize the Wilberforce Act’s existence, then you are being an ignorant idiot and should prepare to be treated accordingly.

By the way — when will religious groups stand up and defend the law that they got passed?

About Greg Diamond

Somewhat verbose worker's rights and government accountability attorney, residing in northwest Brea. General Counsel of CATER, the Coalition of Anaheim Taxpayers for Economic Responsibility, a non-partisan group of people sick of local corruption.
Deposed as Northern Vice Chair of DPOC in April 2014 when his anti-corruption and pro-consumer work in Anaheim infuriated the Building Trades and Teamsters in spring 2014, who then worked with the lawless and power-mad DPOC Chair to eliminate his internal oversight.
Occasionally runs for office to challenge some nasty incumbent who would otherwise run unopposed. (Someday he might pick a fight with the intent to win rather than just dent someone. You'll know it when you see it.) He got 45% of the vote against Bob Huff for State Senate in 2012 and in 2014 became the first attorney to challenge OCDA Tony Rackauckas since 2002.
None of his pre-putsch writings ever spoke for the Democratic Party at the local, county, state, national, or galactic level, nor do they now.
A family member co-owns a business offering campaign treasurer services to Democratic candidates and the odd independent. He is very proud of her. He doesn't directly profit from her work and it doesn't affect his coverage. (He does not always favor her clients, though she might hesitate to take one that he truly hated.)
He does advise some local campaigns informally and (so far) without compensation. (If that last bit changes, he will declare the interest.)

So, in other words, you favor sending them back to circumstances where they will be likely to face child prostitution/slavery. (Or, at best, you favor sending them back without even analyzing whether that’s likely.)

You know, you may not be as good at this “being against child prostitution/slavery” thing as you think you are. This was your first big test — and you want to fail it.

skallywag

Posted July 9, 2014 at 4:19 PM

I am in favor of the same – identical – law as we have concerning illegal Mexican immigrants. Seems to be working well – I haven’t heard any complaints from bleeding heart libs such as yourself concerning how we turn back Mexican illegals. Or are you a completely open borders type?

We can’t be the police force of other countries – have them clean up their own mess. We will probably save more lives and expose illegal immigrants to less opportunity to be abused by demanding that they not enter our country illegally.

No, it’s a good thing, in and of itself. However, the means to pursue that goal can have bad consequences. In this case, the costs of pursuing such a policy are clearly beyond those that members of the population — such as, for example, you — were prepared to accept.

You do get this, right? You understand that you’re among the ones complaining about the effect of this “anti-child prostitution/slavery” law?

Better yet- send the Cliven Bundy vigilante supporters to vex the culprits enabling these refugees–coyotes!!
Let’s see them take aim at the middlemen who profit from vulnerable families and are responsible (?)for their deliverance to US territory. They can openly carry their guns. Wave them around alot. Of course no camera crews to publicize…

The joke is that of course vigilantes who protest big government in their lives would defer to same government’s air “support”. Talk about a euphemism!

This is a complex issue. It deserves rational and fair policy measures that can stand the test of time, as Greg pointed out. For the time being we follow the law. If that is unacceptable ( obviously), short term fixes need implementation.

The Red Cross and Catholic charities are working hard. If these were busloads of puppies we would heed the needs of these sentient beings…stop with the conspiracy theory NIMBY hateful karma blaming. Our nation can do this!

My question is this. Where is the money (at least $3,000 per person) coming from? If the people in these countries are poor, which I have no doubt they are, who is paying for their trip? Are family members sending money from the U.S.? Are the governments of these countries footing the bill do downsize their population? Doesn’t anyone else wonder where all that money is coming from?

I see both sides of the problem but all countries have borders, not just the U.S. Try moving to Canada without a ton of money or well paying job. Our beloved leaders, who kiss the “ring” of corporations, helped create some of the mess they are in, but not all of it. Other countries have political leaders. What are they doing to stop crime besides taking bribes? Why are gangs running rampant?

I think there is something else going on…and this is a smoke screen…maybe keeping us busy fighting amongst ourselves over who is MORE humane…maybe while the TPP sneaks through?

*Inge, don’t look too deeply into the immigrant, slave trade. This is a very big untold story. Cartel in Guatemala, Honduras and others simply kidnap people’s family members…..ask for ransom. Demand ransom. Put people out on the streets to run drugs, babes and gambling. Those that want to escape have to borrow money from relatives in the States….who send them the cash. Half gets taken by the Cartel folks, the other half is used for Coyote travel plans for their kids. Most women are under surveillance and can’t leave. The kids can. If you watch the history of Columbian concept – you will see what is happening in these other countries. The cool part for the Cartels is – if the kids are returned….then the Cartels put their mom’s and relatives out on the street with an indentured debt that will be paid off when they are dead. Nice world, but our wonderful Republican folks keep ramping up – returning these hopeless and desparate people.

Ricardo… I haven’t seen anyone coming from South America riding on trains… there is a lot of coverage stating that Coyotes are charging $3,000 per head. Any news coverage I see shows illegals coming to US via walking or riding small boats only. There are some unaccompanied children being interviewed who have the address of their moms living in the US. Are their moms sending money to pay for their trip, hoping their kids will be able to stay because of the Dream Act? As a mom I would want my kid to get out of an unsafe living condition as well. I understand why these moms are doing what they are doing.

What I don’t understand is why government officials including the police in these countries get away with all this corruption? And these countries are not the only ones who are corrupt.

Wow, are you saying that King Obama finally found a law he actually wants to follow and not over ride with his pen and phone to do what ever he as King decides?? Of course he and the Democrats are going on and on about how it is the law and must be followed! Shocker….first immigration law they have ever followed! So if we are in to following laws on the books, those Dreamers better get packed up so we can follow this law and keep these latest border jumpers! No law say Dreamers can be here!

I’m also saying that the loud and sanctimonious proponents of this bill (same group that pushed Prop 35) should, if they have any decency and honor, now step forward to defend it. Meanwhile, let’s listen to the celestial choir of crickets.

I asked the above question because as a voice vote I can’t seem to find a definitive answer to the question. Was BHO even present during the voting process or was he out on the campaign trail, as he is so predisposed to do, ignoring his responsibilities as a representative that he was elected for, but I digress…

IF in fact he did vote for the bill in question, then he does bare some responsibility for it as well as GWB, right along with the rest of the well intending fools that voted for it.

I have said more times than I want to remember, that not only is the devil in the details but those devils always have unintended consequences that cause a cascade of other problems.

The simpler the laws, the fewer the problems. The less power is held in the hands of govt. the less it can screw up. THIS is however one of those areas that the federal govt actually is supposed to act and does have the authority and responsibility to act to control the international borders and they get what grade….anyone…anyone…?

As usual it has FAILED miserably in that responsibility and continues to make a bad situation worse. It’s certainly not the first or last time this will happen but it reminds me that the voting public as a whole, is insane.

Insane, in that they will continue to vote in representatives that continue to think and vote that the govt can solve all of life’s problems, when we all know deep down that’s complete and total BS.

Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. IF the people hold the power it is far less corruptible than if that power is held in only a few hands. Funny how that works! Or hell, place a cable company guy into the position of head of FCC…is this a great country or what?